• @RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    181 month ago

    Humans have teeth suitable for both meat and plant foods. So I would say humans are omnivores.

    I may be wrong, but a 100% vegan only diet I think requires supplements to be taken for certain things like proteins that humans need in order to live. Of course, those certain proteins are found in meats.

    However, I think saying humans are carnovires would also be incorrect, and a 100% meat only diet would be I think equally as unhealthy as a 100% plant only diet.

    • @1stTime4MeInMCU@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      181 month ago

      I don’t think you read my post carefully. I said humans have teeth for both meat and plants. I didn’t say that humans aren’t omnivores. I just said (implicitly) that they are not obligate omnivores.

      Proteins are not a concern, you can get all essential amino acids through only plant protein. Pretty much the only one that is hard to get enough of is B12. With real determination it can be done but it’s easier to just supplement. By the way, most omnis also do not get enough B12 and eat supplements either directly or through fortified foods. It’s just usually they are getting it through fortified milk which vegans don’t drink.

    • a plant based diet is completely healthy as long as you eat varied foods and don’t try something stupid like subsisting on apples and dandelions.

      There are world renowned athletes who are plant based…

    • @MilitantVegan@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      71 month ago

      The idea that a pure plant-based diet can’t provide all the protein we need has been thoroughly debunked for a long time.

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DMwf_9wqWY0&pp=ygUdc3RhbmZvcmQgc2NpZW50aXN0IG9uIHByb3RlaW4%3D

      The nutrient you’re thinking of is b12. Vegans need to supplement b12 (for now, discoveries are still being made on that front). But at the same time, in a sense, so does everyone else.

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UUyiiNwDNLU&pp=ygUOZWQgd2ludGVycyBiMTI%3D

    • @MilitantVegan@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      -17
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      And going back to your main point, it’s really just dubious to draw conclusions about what we are “meant” to eat based on the shape of our teeth. If all we’re considering is health and history, it’s not entirely accurate to say we’re just omnivores. It’s more like we are predominantly herbivores with some capacity for opportunistic omnivory in emergencies, but our ability to live on animal foods is rudimentary at best and comes at a high health cost. Also consider that from a Paleolithic standpoint, early humans would have been eating much more bugs as their protein, as that would have been far more abundant and easily gathered. Hunting is unreliable, and in most circumstances would have been a luxury at best (the book “Edible” goes into this).

      Of course we also are becoming more intelligent, and have emerged the capacity for moral evolution. The paleo concept as a whole is ultimately just the argument from tradition fallacy. We can do better.

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FNIoKmMq6cs&pp=ygUhcGFsZW9udG9sb2dpc3QgZGVidW5rcyBwYWxlbyBkaWV0

      • @intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        430 days ago

        The paleo argument is about matching the environment of evolutionary adaptedness in diet, not tradition.

        People seem to forget that human evolution started 3 billion years ago so our evolutionarily-adapted diet isn’t just “paleo”